dcsimg Appeals and Issues

Appeals and Issues

Related Content

Practices
Firm News
Print

Appellate litigation must not be an afterthought. A carefully framed, well-argued appeal can reverse a damaging trial court verdict or preserve a crucial victory. The appeals and issues team of McGuireWoods has the specific appellate experience and a thorough understanding of trial court practice that enables us to handle our clients’ complex and unique appellate needs, wherever and whenever they arise.

Our Team

Our veteran team members have successfully handled numerous high-stakes appeals for clients across the country. To provide more efficient service and to complement our senior lawyers’ experience before the appellate bench, we draw on the additional resources of associates with recent clerkship experience in various state and federal courts of appeal. Our team includes former clerks of the United States Supreme Court, numerous U.S. circuit courts of appeal, and the highest state courts in the key states in which we practice.

Our Focus

Our appellate practice focuses on the federal circuit courts of appeal and state appellate courts, because these courts resolve the majority of the cases that matter most to our clients. In addition, when an opportunity to seek Supreme Court review arises, we are prepared to seek certiorari and advance the appeal to its conclusion.

Our Approach

Working closely with our clients, we assemble the best team to handle each matter. Members of the appellate team are led by the firm’s most experienced lawyers, and include senior firm associates as well as clients’ own in-house counsel, key staff and outside advisors. Potentially appealable issues can arise at any stage of trial court proceedings; with this in mind, we regularly assist clients and other outside counsel at any point in the life of a case. Areas of service include assistance with pre-trial strategy, identifying and briefing key legal and evidentiary issues, monitoring trials to ensure that issues are preserved for appeal, and handling post-trial motions.

Throughout this process, we help identify opportunities to raise and resolve issues that will advance our clients’ positions in a particular case (and in the longer term), while simultaneously developing an appellate strategy before suits are filed. When a fresh look and new analysis are required on appeal, we can partner with trial counsel or step in to take over the case. At all times, we calibrate our approach to the specific needs and issues presented by each case.

CONTACTS

Robert M. Tyler Partner T: +1 804 775 7695
J. Tracy Walker IV Partner T: +1 804 775 1131
Marshall Beil Partner T: +1 212 548 7004
Thomas M. Farrell Partner T: +1 713 353 6677
David L. Hartsell Partner T: +1 312 750 8898
Bradley R. Kutrow Partner T: +1 704 343 2049
Amy Miller Partner T: +1 202 857 1732
H. Wayne Phears Partner T: +1 404 443 5718
Paul K. Stockman Partner T: +1 412 667 7945
Leslie M. Werlin Partner T: +1 310 315 8222
Results 1-20 of 25
Show All
Representative Matter

One of the largest producers and transporters of energy in the United States

Representation of multiple defendants including one of the largest producers and transporters of energy in the United States in a high-profile nuisance suit in federal district court in Mississippi asserting that the defendants’ air emissions are contributing to global warming.
Case Study

McGuireWoods insurance lawyers help overturn ‘pro-insurer’ 5th U.S. Circuit Decision

Austin lawyers Mark Lawless and Pam Hopper recently co-authored an amicus curiae brief filed in an important insurance case pending in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 15, 2012, the 5th Circuit issued a pro-insurer decision in Ewing Construction Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., No. 11-40512, holding that the contractual liability exclusion in a construction contractor's CGL policy eliminates the insurer's duty to defend if the contractor assumes liabilities in a construction contract – in this case, liabilities for alleged faulty construction of tennis courts.
Case Study

U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of firm client CompuCredit

In an 8–1 decision, the United States Supreme Court this week ruled in favor of firm client CompuCredit Corporation, upholding the enforceability of a contractual arbitration clause in a credit card agreement. A team of McGuireWoods attorneys served as lead counsel for CompuCredit in the district court and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and associated with O’Melveny & Myers and Kirkland & Ellis in Washington, D.C., for the Supreme Court appeal.

Representative Matter

Leading supplier of rail-based freight transportation

Effective defense of leading supplier of rail-based freight transportation in North America in nuisance case. Resulted in summary judgment for client and dismissal of case. Upheld on appeal by United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit based on preemption. McGuireWoods has handled several nuisance cases in multiple jurisdictions for this client.
Case Study

Victory in 4th Circuit for pro bono client Homeward

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the dismissal of a case brought against firm pro bono client Homeward, a nonprofit planning and coordinating organization for homeless services in the greater Richmond area. In its suit, ASWAN, an unincorporated association made up of homeless and formerly homeless people, alleged that Homeward and its co-defendants established a homeless services center in a location that was removed from the downtown area of Richmond, thus violating 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985(3), the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Fair Housing Act. The district court dismissed all of the plaintiff’s claims.
Case Study

Finkl team wins ERISA anti-cutback case in 7th Circuit

McGuireWoods represented the pension plan of A. Finkl & Sons Company in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in a lawsuit claiming that the pension plan had violated ERISA's anti-cutback rule and the terms of the pension plan. The plaintiffs claimed that Finkl had an obligation to terminate the pension plan and provide annuities to the plaintiffs while the plaintiffs were still working for the company. The Court of Appeals, affirming the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, found that Finkl had no obligation to terminate the pension plan and that the plaintiffs' ERISA rights were not violated.

Case Study

Boeing victory in SOX whistleblower case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the whistleblower provisions in Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) do not protect employee leaks to the media. Rather, the statute’s plain language protects only disclosures made to federal regulatory and law enforcement agencies, Congress and employee supervisors.
Representative Matter

Power and solar energy businesses

Served as lead trial counsel to our client in a multimillion-dollar breach of contract action, in which our client obtained an almost $9 million jury verdict against a St. Louis based company for breach of a three-year silicon power supply agreement.
Case Study

Houston office receives favorable ruling from 5th Circuit clearing BP Traders of propane antitrust plot

McGuireWoods recently received a favorable ruling from the 5th Circuit affirming the dismissal of a criminal case accusing four ex-BP Products North America Inc. commodities traders of conspiring to manipulate the U.S. propane market. This case was only the second attempted criminal prosecution for manipulation in the long history of the Commodities Exchange Act.

Case Study

Firm secures appeal of no penalty enforcement action for CSX

McGuireWoods recently defended the appeal of an Illinois Pollution Control Board decision refusing to issue a penalty against CSX (one of the nation's leading transportation companies, providing rail-based transportation services) for certain environmental violations. The Illinois Attorney General's Office had appealed the board's decision - made on cross motions for summary judgment - that CSX violated the Illinois Environmental Protection Act with respect to an oil spill in its East St. Louis yard.
Case Study

Appellate court affirms dismissal for Harmony Health Plan of Illinois Inc. and Amerigroup Illinois Inc.

On May 15, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court found that reimbursements made by Medicaid Managed Care Organizations Harmony Health Plan of Illinois Inc., and Amerigroup Illinois Inc. to emergency medical service providers were in accordance with federal and state law, as well as the parties' agreements as Medicaid payers and providers.

Case Study

Complete victory for Siemens Medical Solutions

McGuireWoods partner Dana Rust and associate Bobby Holland convinced the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm the dismissal of a $1.77 million claim against Siemens Medical Solutions, manufacturer and marketer of a wide range of medical equipment, including MRI systems, radiation therapy equipment, and patient monitoring systems.

Case Study

McGuireWoods goes before U.S. Court of Appeals for nation's third largest drug store chain

McGuireWoods won before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in favor of Rite Aid, the nation's No. 3 drugstore chain. A former Rite Aid employee filed a lawsuit alleging race discrimination, defamation and battery. The employee filed the first action in state court, but Rite Aid removed to federal court. In the first action, the court granted summary judgment with regard to federal claims, and adopting the magistrate's report and recommendation, declined to exercise jurisdiction over state law claims—dismissing state law claims without prejudice.
Case Study

McGuireWoods secures 9th Circuit Court ruling: League of Residential Neighborhood Advocates v. the City of Los Angeles

McGuireWoods represented a group of residents in this case when a federal appeals court overturned a lower court’s decision that had permitted an Orthodox Jewish congregation to operate a synagogue in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Hancock Park, pursuant to a settlement agreement entered into between the city and the congregation.

Representative Matter

Leading supplier of rail-basedfreight transportation

Represented a leading supplier of rail-based freight transportation in North America in class action alleging diesel emissions and noise.
Representative Matter

US based international management and technology consulting company

Appellant worked as a subcontractor to a subcontractor on a US Coast Guard project. He brought claims against our client, another contractor working on the project, alleging that our client's employees illegally conspired with the Coast Guard to have him removed from the project.
Representative Matter

Apartment building operator

Established clear precedent for the first time in Virginia for the requirements to obtain judgment against the beneficiary of a fraudulent conveyance where funds were comingled so that the conveyance could not be unwound.
Representative Matter

Fortune 100 financial institution

Represented a bank in defending against an employment appeal. The District Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint, which contained claims of discrimination, retaliation, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress and denied Plaintiff’s motion to amend. The Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the case and held that the District Court properly denied Plaintiff’s motion to amend because the motion did not remedy the factual shortcomings of her complaint to meet the Twombly and Iqbal pleading standards.
Representative Matter

One of the largest producers and transporters of energy in the United States

Represented a large utility company before the Virginia Supreme court in a challenge to an eminent domain proceeding. This appeal stems from a successful motion to strike respondent’s experts at trial that resulted in a jury award being very favorable to our client.
Representative Matter

Arbiter of interscholastic competition among public high schools in Virginia

Represented an entity that regulates public high school athletics in Virginia. Motion for temporary injunction denied and motion to dismiss granted in challenge by parents of high school athletes contesting the interscholastic group's transfer rule.
Results 1-20 of 25
Results 1-25 of 36
Show All
Amanda Abshire Amanda West Abshire
Associate 		201 North Tryon Street
Suite 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2146
T: +1 704 343 2196
F: +1 704 444 8764
vCard
John D Adams John D. Adams
Partner 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030

2001 K Street N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
T: +1 804 775 4744
F: +1 804 698 2061
vCard
Tammy L Adkins Tammy L. Adkins
Counsel 		77 West Wacker Drive
Suite 4100
Chicago, IL 60601-1818
T: +1 312 750 5727
F: +1 312 920 6193
vCard
Marshall Beil Marshall Beil
Partner 		1345 Avenue of the Americas
7th Floor
New York, NY 10105-0106
T: +1 212 548 7004
F: +1 212 715 2319
vCard
Eric Bilik R. Eric Bilik
Partner 		Bank of America Tower
50 North Laura Street
Suite 3300
Jacksonville, FL 32202-3661
T: +1 904 798 2685
F: +1 904 360 6304
vCard
Phillip Chang Phillip C. Chang
Associate 		2001 K Street N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
T: +1 202 857 1725
F: +1 202 828 2995
vCard
Tennille J Checkovich Tennille J. Checkovich
Partner 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 4758
F: +1 804 440 7770
vCard
Joshua D Davey Joshua D. Davey
Associate 		201 North Tryon Street
Suite 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2146
T: +1 704 343 2167
F: +1 704 805 5019
vCard
Kathleen H Dooley Kathleen H. Dooley
Partner 		201 North Tryon Street
Suite 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2146
T: +1 704 343 2347
F: +1 704 444 8755
vCard
R. Patrick Dover R. Patrick Dover
Associate 		Promenade
1230 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Suite 2100
Atlanta, GA 30309-3534
T: +1 404 443 5703
F: +1 404 443 5768
vCard
Thomas M Farrell Thomas M. Farrell
Partner 		JPMorgan Chase Tower
600 Travis Street
Suite 7500
Houston, TX 77002-2906
T: +1 713 353 6677
F: +1 832 214 9933
vCard
Matthew A Fitzgerald Matthew A. Fitzgerald
Associate 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 4716
F: +1 804 698 2251
vCard
A. Brooks Gresham
Partner 		1800 Century Park East
8th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1501
T: +1 310 315 8291
F: +1 310 956 3104
vCard
J. Curtis Griner J. Curtis Griner
Associate 		201 North Tryon Street
Suite 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2146
T: +1 704 343 2013
F: +1 704 373 8833
vCard
Jacob P Hildner Jacob P. Hildner
Counsel 		77 West Wacker Drive
Suite 4100
Chicago, IL 60601-1818
T: +1 312 849 8198
F: +1 312 698 4545
vCard
Robert L Hodges Robert L. Hodges
Of Counsel 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 7513
F: +1 804 698 2082
vCard
Matthew C Kane Matthew C. Kane
Partner 		1800 Century Park East
8th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1501
T: +1 310 315 8295
F: +1 310 956 3195
vCard
Bradley R Kutrow Bradley R. Kutrow
Partner 		201 North Tryon Street
Suite 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202-2146
T: +1 704 343 2049
F: +1 704 343 2300
vCard
Robert W Loftin Robert W. Loftin
Associate 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 4715
F: +1 804 698 2177
vCard
K. Lorraine Lord K. Lorraine Lord
Senior Counsel 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 4747
F: +1 804 698 2081
vCard
Leonard J Marsico Leonard J. Marsico
Partner 		EQT Plaza
625 Liberty Avenue
23rd Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3142

2001 K Street N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
T: +1 412 667 7987
F: +1 412 667 7956
vCard
Jeffrey D McMahan Jr Jeffrey D. McMahan Jr.
Associate 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 1132
F: +1 804 698 2092
vCard
H. Wayne Phears H. Wayne Phears
Partner 		Promenade
1230 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Suite 2100
Atlanta, GA 30309-3534
T: +1 404 443 5718
F: +1 404 443 5770
vCard
Anand V Ramana Anand V. Ramana
Associate 		2001 K Street N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
T: +1 202 857 1734
F: +1 202 828 2973
vCard
Jontille D Ray Jontille D. Ray
Associate 		One James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
T: +1 804 775 1173
F: +1 804 698 2232
vCard
Results 1-25 of 36